bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Of course not but it does say something about them. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the more people you have with little or no coverage, the lower average life expectancy will be. Even if you aren't sick, it's surprising what effect a doctor's periodic carping at a regular checkup can do to encourage many people to adopt healthier lifestyles. Japanese women live the longest....yet France is touted as having the "best" health care system, whatever that means. American demographics and risk behaviors preclude winning the longevity contest "It's better to burn out than fade away" - Neil Young Americans are not trying to change the CHA, but domestic politicos can't stand the idea of a "traitor" bad mouthing the third rail in Canadian politics. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Riverwind Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Of course health insurance can be purchased by an individual in the US. There are many types of policies and underwriters. And that includes dental insurance.Sure. But getting coverage that comes close to what a Canadian gets costs >$1000/month. Cheaper plans don't help people that expect comphensive no exclusions coverage like the woman who appeared on Fox. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Sure. But getting coverage that comes close to what a Canadian gets costs >$1000/month. Cheaper plans don't help people that expect comphensive no exclusions coverage like the woman who appeared on Fox. You are assuming that level of coverage is desired by all. Young people in good health only need a catastrophic policy and can pay for preventive care out of pocket....saving thousands. I can insure my family for about $500 per month if I had to buy a private policy. The "woman on Fox" is a poltical problem for Canada, not Americans. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 No doubt....as in "triage" for preemie beds in BC.....off to the "states" we go little one. Go Seahawks!Don't need a house if I'm dead. Americans don't like to suffer in queue as a patriotic duty. Eff that. Canadians with means and private insurance don't like to wait either. How many Canadians are dying in queue vs Americans losing their life savings? Canadians DON'T lose their homes because of Canadian medical costs... and Americans probably die waiting for services too. I can't believe how often stuff like this comes up. Do you think everyone is given a number and told to take a seat and wait? You make some snarky comment about premies being shipped off to the "states" (why the quotes?). Got some stats or numbers or ANYthing to back that up? Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) How many Canadians are dying in queue vs Americans losing their life savings? Americans lose "life savings" for many reasons.....health care is not a right...not even in Canada. Canadians DON'T lose their homes because of Canadian medical costs... and Americans probably die waiting for services too. Good...then why are people whining about this Fox interview? I can't believe how often stuff like this comes up. Do you think everyone is given a number and told to take a seat and wait? You make some snarky comment about premies being shipped off to the "states" (why the quotes?). Got some stats or numbers or ANYthing to back that up? Get a clue...buy a vowel. It is common knowledge that Canada often lacks the facilities or staff to provide certain services, most notably in recent press has been the shortage of preemie beds. I am not trying to change your broke dick system....why do some Canadians get so defensive if it has the best health care system in the greatest country on earth? Just in case.....here is the number for the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.....1-507-284-2511 Edited July 21, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Americans lose "life savings" for many reasons.....health care is not a right...not even in Canada. Nice dodge. No wait, it's not... I noticed. Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Nice dodge. No wait, it's not... I noticed. Same way provinces dodge preemie care....thank God for the US of A! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Same way provinces dodge preemie care....thank God for the US of A! My niece got incredible premie care here at home. Is it sometimes necessary to send them elsewhere? Sadly yes. Do people use these situations to puff up their chests and crow about how much better their country is? Again, sadly yes. Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
Wilber Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Americans are not trying to change the CHA, but domestic politicos can't stand the idea of a "traitor" bad mouthing the third rail in Canadian politics. I have to agree with that statement. I don't know why Canadians care what is said about our system south of the border either. Nor do I know why they care about what system the US uses. Each to their own. I wouldn't trade systems with you however. One thing, you would never be denied treatment in Canada for a pre-existing condition, even if you just immigrated from the US last week. Quote "Never trust a man who has not a single redeeming vice". WSC
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 My niece got incredible premie care here at home. Is it sometimes necessary to send them elsewhere? Sadly yes. That is soooooo cute....."Sadly yes". Guess you found the facts and are now singing a different tune, eh? Do people use these situations to puff up their chests and crow about how much better their country is? Well, we all know that Canada is the greatest country on earth....and experts at outsourcing for preemie care. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 That is soooooo cute....."Sadly yes". Guess you found the facts and are now singing a different tune, eh?Well, we all know that Canada is the greatest country on earth....and experts at outsourcing for preemie care. When one has nothing to add, he must resort to ridiculing his "opponent". I never disputed the "facts". I'm well aware that sometimes patients have to be sent elsewhere. That's one of the great things of being such close allies - we share resources as we can. Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
Bonam Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Canadians DON'T lose their homes because of Canadian medical costs... Yeah, instead they just don't have money to buy homes in the first place, since they are pay significantly higher taxes. Some are, for sure.I think you understood the "fror free" comment, but just in case... yes, we pay for our health care through our taxes. This means when we go to the doctor or the hospital of the lab for tests, there usually aren't any fees, so in essence, we're going for free. You just said that yes, we pay for it through taxes. Our healthcare is not free. We pay for it before the fact, whether we need it or not, just like people that buy private insurance do. What does it matter whether your income is say $5000/month, $2000 of it goes to tax, and you get free healthcare or if your income is $5000/month, $1500 of it goes to tax, and you pay $500/month for health insurance? No difference at all, and yet you claim that the first system is "free" while the second system is supposedly "people making money off the sick". Obviously these numbers are just illustrative examples. You can look up real stats and costs for yourself if you prefer. If you do, you'll find that the average US citizen actually has more money left coming in after paying for tax and healthcare than the average Canadian citizen does. We don't have to sink ourselves into debt or declare bankruptcy if we're sick or injured. And yet we make less money to begin with since more of it is taxed away. The effect of our system is it places a lesser burden on those with poor health and/or low income than they would have in the US, and it places a greater burden on those with good health and/or high income than they would have in the US. Some may consider this a good thing, others may not. Quote
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Yeah, instead they just don't have money to buy homes in the first place, since they are pay significantly higher taxes. You just said that yes, we pay for it through taxes. Our healthcare is not free. We pay for it before the fact, whether we need it or not, just like people that buy private insurance do. What does it matter whether your income is say $5000/month, $2000 of it goes to tax, and you get free healthcare or if your income is $5000/month, $1500 of it goes to tax, and you pay $500/month for health insurance? No difference at all, and yet you claim that the first system is "free" while the second system is supposedly "people making money off the sick". Obviously these numbers are just illustrative examples. You can look up real stats and costs for yourself if you prefer. If you do, you'll find that the average US citizen actually has more money left coming in after paying for tax and healthcare than the average Canadian citizen does. And yet we make less money to begin with since more of it is taxed away. The effect of our system is it places a lesser burden on those with poor health and/or low income than they would have in the US, and it places a greater burden on those with good health and/or high income than they would have in the US. Some may consider this a good thing, others may not. That's like bitching about EI, whining that after paying into it for years you never collected a cent and how unfair that is. It's insurance. Good for you for maintaining steady employment and having great health. I don't really get the point of your argument. You lost me right off the top, with the home owner comment. Do you have any stats that would indicate a greater percentage of Americans own their homes versus Canadians? If not, I fail to see the relevance. Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
jdobbin Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Yeah, instead they just don't have money to buy homes in the first place, since they are pay significantly higher taxes. Are you referring to Canadians? http://books.google.ca/books?id=2MeFvILg4j...lt&resnum=1 Canadian home ownership is higher than in the U.S. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 When one has nothing to add, he must resort to ridiculing his "opponent". You are not an opponent...just another member like me. I never disputed the "facts". I'm well aware that sometimes patients have to be sent elsewhere. That's one of the great things of being such close allies - we share resources as we can. Oh..it must have been another lily who posted this: I can't believe how often stuff like this comes up. Do you think everyone is given a number and told to take a seat and wait? You make some snarky comment about premies being shipped off to the "states" (why the quotes?). Got some stats or numbers or ANYthing to back that up? Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
M.Dancer Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Since we are talking heathcare and preemies... My daughter was born under 2 lbs and 101/2 weeks early. My wife had been diagnosed with placentia privia early in the pregnancy, confined to home and bedrest...it was touch and go ...manily going to the hospital every week or so because she would be bleeding... We were at North York General for the last bleeding....waited in the hall at emergency for a 4 hours...then a room. One doctor had looked at her, told her to lie still...a couple of hours later she was bleeding like a sieve...I had to find a nurse and literally shout at her that the floor was covered in blood....a few IVs later, steroids...etc Then they told us she would be transfered, that they didn't have a neo natal intensive care unit and there were no beds in the Toronto area. The search would encompass Hamilton, Kingston and Bufaloo... Lucky for us a preemie died at women's college....my wife had excellent care and my daughter thrives. The point is, with a public system there should be no good excuse for a patient not to have care and be forced to, on there own dime to go outside of the system. We have a good system here but it is not above critique and there have been major flaws which still need addressing. I think it is wholley appropriate for that woman to raise thenhue and cry over her case and to sue for damages to her purse. Quote RIGHT of SOME, LEFT of OTHERS If it is a choice between them and us, I choose us
jdobbin Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 I don't really get the point of your argument. You lost me right off the top, with the home owner comment. Do you have any stats that would indicate a greater percentage of Americans own their homes versus Canadians? If not, I fail to see the relevance. Canadians have had a larger percentage of home ownership for a while. I know there have been several books on taxes and home ownership. I have put up a link for just one of those books. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Lucky for us a preemie died at women's college....my wife had excellent care and my daughter thrives. Dude.....that's hard core...but I know what you mean. I think it is wholley appropriate for that woman to raise thenhue and cry over her case and to sue for damages to her purse. Agreed....she isn't required to suck it up and suffer just to satisfy Tommy Douglas. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
nicky10013 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 If the private market place is so good at distrubiting health care cheaply and efficiently, how come the United States, a nation with 3,000 different health insurance companies has the highest costs of any country in the western world? 45 million are off insurance and no one can sit here and tell me that those 45 million don't want insurance. The fact is that its way too expensive despite the competition. In the end, health care is an inelastic commodity. Everyone needs it so companies can charge whatever they want despite how many other companies exist within the marketplace. Companies also give out insurance and deny claims based on "pre-existing conditions." Despite people who actually pay for health insurance, another way to make money is to deny care. I'd seriously like to know how many people per thousand in the states die of denied care compared to people who wait here. Something tells me in the states it would be drastically higher. People in Canada generally get the treatment that they need. The waits at the emergency rooms are caused mostly by people who have a cold. If you go in and have a broken leg, you're going to be seen over someone who has the sniffles. I've had quite a few tests and have had appointments booked for the next week. Furthermore, the libertarian notion that since the government is involved costs are automatically higher due to increased bureaucracy etc. is also out of theory and not reality. The fact is medicaid in the states only spends 2% of it's budget on administration compared to 27% that normal insurance companies do. In Canada, health care costs are 1/3 of what they are in the states despite EVERYONE being covered. In the end, health care is indeed a right if not an economic necessity. America's increasingly incompetitve economy is due to the fact that employers have to burden this heavy load of health care for workers. When the auto-pact was signed in the 60s, GM, Ford and Chrysler all opened up plants in Ontario because they didn't have to pay the same kind of benefits that they do south of the border. Furthermore, how can someone honestly say that just because they make more money they're entitled to better health care then a person living on the street? We're all human beings, we all deserve to be cared for. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) If the private market place is so good at distrubiting health care cheaply and efficiently, how come the United States, a nation with 3,000 different health insurance companies has the highest costs of any country in the western world? 45 million are off insurance and no one can sit here and tell me that those 45 million don't want insurance. Because insurance dollars are chasing excess capacity and demand. Canada has the highest cost and least effective universal access system amongst OECD nations. There are millions of Americans who will remain "off insurance" by choice. ....People in Canada generally get the treatment that they need. The waits at the emergency rooms are caused mostly by people who have a cold. If you go in and have a broken leg, you're going to be seen over someone who has the sniffles. I've had quite a few tests and have had appointments booked for the next week. "Generally" isn't good enough for Americans (and Canadians) with the means to do better. Furthermore, the libertarian notion that since the government is involved costs are automatically higher due to increased bureaucracy etc. is also out of theory and not reality. The fact is medicaid in the states only spends 2% of it's budget on administration compared to 27% that normal insurance companies do. In Canada, health care costs are 1/3 of what they are in the states despite EVERYONE being covered. Then why do provinces send cases to the excess capacity and higher costs in the "states"? In the end, health care is indeed a right if not an economic necessity. Nonsense...health care is not a right...not even in Canada. ... Furthermore, how can someone honestly say that just because they make more money they're entitled to better health care then a person living on the street? We're all human beings, we all deserve to be cared for. I make more money so I will spend it for better health care if I so choose. My family is not required to suffer in queue to satisfy some commie ideal for all human beings. You know damn well where such a logical argument would take us.....let's start in SubSaharan Africa. Edited July 21, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
Riverwind Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Because insurance dollars are chasing excess capacity and demand. Canada has the highest cost and least effective universal access system amongst OECD nations. There are millions of Americans who will remain "off insurance" by choice.Only because they are guaranteed emergency care if they need it even if they can't pay the bill. These kinds of a guarantees are one of the reasons why the US system is just as socialized as Canada's. Theonly difference is the US likes to pretend it is not socialized medicine,Then why do provinces send cases to the excess capacity and higher costs in the "states"?Because it is cheaper than building the excess capacity in Canada. If the US did not provide that capacity Canada would build the necessary capacity itself. Quote To fly a plane, you need both a left wing and a right wing.
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Only because they are guaranteed emergency care if they need it even if they can't pay the bill. These kinds of a guarantees are one of the reasons why the US system is just as socialized as Canada's. Theonly difference is the US likes to pretend it is not socialized medicine, Once stabilized, a deadbeat patient will be transferred to a public hospital in a heartbeat. Just like in Canada, there is a private health care industry that can't be bothered with such commie notions. Pay up or get out. Because it is cheaper than building the excess capacity in Canada. If the US did not provide that capacity Canada would build the necessary capacity itself. Then perhaps your skilled medical profesionals would stay in Canada after all that "free" medical training? Lack of neo-natal facilities is playing things pretty close...close to the border that is. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
nicky10013 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Because insurance dollars are chasing excess capacity and demand. Canada has the highest cost and least effective universal access system amongst OECD nations. There are millions of Americans who will remain "off insurance" by choice."Generally" isn't good enough for Americans (and Canadians) with the means to do better. Then why do provinces send cases to the excess capacity and higher costs in the "states"? Nonsense...health care is not a right...not even in Canada. I make more money so I will spend it for better health care if I so choose. My family is not required to suffer in queue to satisfy some commie ideal for all human beings. You know damn well where such a logical argument would take us.....let's start in SubSaharan Africa. No offense, but your family is not better than the rest of society and have no more right to medical care than anyone else. I agree with private markets but people's lives can't be trifled with in that way, in the end, we're all people and all have the same right to live. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I guess that doesn't really matter anymore. If it's illegal to sell organs then why is it legal for insurance companies to be making money off of people with cancer? Whether you think its communist or not, it's not something that should be left to profiteers so they can scalp money from dying people, especially when the private market neither helps people get coverage or makes it cheaper. The fact that you think your family would be stiffled in a queue also shows how little you know about socialised medicine. Fact is, , despite Canada's shortcomes, and there are a lot, government is the best way to distribute health care. It's equitable and it costs quite a bit less. There's no libertarian argument that can make that untrue. Quote
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 (edited) No offense, but your family is not better than the rest of society and have no more right to medical care than anyone else. Of course not, since health care is not a right at all. My family is "better off" in many aspects because of economic resources and circumstances of my own making for the most part, and if we choose to get the best boob jobs, then we will do so. I agree with private markets but people's lives can't be trifled with in that way, in the end, we're all people and all have the same right to live. Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. What? Are you serious? What will you sacrifice for the SubSaharan Africans? I guess that doesn't really matter anymore. If it's illegal to sell organs then why is it legal for insurance companies to be making money off of people with cancer? Whether you think its communist or not, it's not something that should be left to profiteers so they can scalp money from dying people, especially when the private market neither helps people get coverage or makes it cheaper. Why should medical professionals and manufacturing forego such profit potential compared to farmers (food), or landlords (housing). I don't know why you hold health care in such high regard. Appropriating and controlling the services of others for the common good is communism, not just socialism. The fact that you think your family would be stiffled in a queue also shows how little you know about socialised medicine. Fact is, , despite Canada's shortcomes, and there are a lot, government is the best way to distribute health care. It's equitable and it costs quite a bit less. There's no libertarian argument that can make that untrue. I don't give a shit about equitable....nor am I trying to change the CHA. If you enjoy doing your patriotic duty by waiting in queue for removal of a benign or malignant brain tumor, be my guest. But you do not have the right to limit the choices of others if they have the means to do better. PS. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness does not apply to Canada....PM Trudeau forgot to copy that in the Charter. Edited July 21, 2009 by bush_cheney2004 Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
lily Posted July 21, 2009 Report Posted July 21, 2009 Since we are talking heathcare and preemies...My daughter was born under 2 lbs and 101/2 weeks early. My wife had been diagnosed with placentia privia early in the pregnancy, confined to home and bedrest...it was touch and go ...manily going to the hospital every week or so because she would be bleeding... We were at North York General for the last bleeding....waited in the hall at emergency for a 4 hours...then a room. One doctor had looked at her, told her to lie still...a couple of hours later she was bleeding like a sieve...I had to find a nurse and literally shout at her that the floor was covered in blood....a few IVs later, steroids...etc Then they told us she would be transfered, that they didn't have a neo natal intensive care unit and there were no beds in the Toronto area. The search would encompass Hamilton, Kingston and Bufaloo... Lucky for us a preemie died at women's college....my wife had excellent care and my daughter thrives. The point is, with a public system there should be no good excuse for a patient not to have care and be forced to, on there own dime to go outside of the system. We have a good system here but it is not above critique and there have been major flaws which still need addressing. I think it is wholley appropriate for that woman to raise thenhue and cry over her case and to sue for damages to her purse. Are we swapping anecdotes? All right then. I'll see you your premie and raise you mine... or rather, my sister's. My niece was born 15 weeks early, weighing slightly over a pound. My sis was in the hospital prior to the delivery, trying in vain to stop labour. She delivered her right there in the hospital, didn't need a transfer at all. My niece spent the next 3 or so months in the SCN at the adjoining Children's Hospital. Again, no transfer to another hospital, local or the "states" (why are we putting this in quotes, anyway?) My sis had excellent care and her baby thrived too. Point? Not really sure. Anecdotal evidence is interesting, but doesn't give an overall picture. Quote I'll rise, but I won't shine.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.